Author Topic: New York Times article on cast iron cookware  (Read 3012 times)

Offline Mark R. Smith

  • Regular member
  • *
  • Posts: 268
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • WAGS: The heartbeat of cast iron collecting.
New York Times article on cast iron cookware
« on: June 29, 2016, 08:42:35 AM »
Nice little article fron the NYT website about the new popular trend of cooking with cast iron and how it has expanded. Also mentions the new foundries making cast iron in the USA. They did mention Lodge.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/dining/cast-iron-skillet-finex-field-company.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=mini-moth&region=top-stories-below&WT.nav=top-stories-below&_r=0

Offline Tom Neitzel

  • Administrator
  • Regular member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5964
  • Karma: +2/-1
Re: New York Times article on cast iron cookware
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2016, 08:56:39 AM »
Nice article.  Thanks Mark.

Offline Roger Muse

  • Regular member
  • *
  • Posts: 96
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • WAGS: The heartbeat of cast iron collecting.
Re: New York Times article on cast iron cookware
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2016, 10:01:23 AM »
Saw one of the Finex cast iron skillets a few months ago.  Was NOT impressed.
It looked rough cast, and the cooking surface, while machined, left about a 1/4" unmachined edge around the whole thing.
The machining wasn't the smooth surface like an old Griswold.  If you ran a fingernail across it you can catch it on every single blade cut in the surface.
It also wasn't a discernible weight difference from a Lodge.

Offline Claudia Killebrew

  • Forever in our hearts!
  • Regular member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2076
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New York Times article on cast iron cookware
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2016, 12:48:58 PM »
Wapak Chickenfoot? That's a new one on me. Is there another name for it? Pictures anyone?

Offline Russell Ware

  • Administrator
  • Regular member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2039
  • Karma: +4/-0
  • WAGS: Heartbeat of Cast Iron Cookware Collecting
Re: New York Times article on cast iron cookware
« Reply #4 on: June 29, 2016, 01:25:08 PM »
Quote
Wapak Chickenfoot? That's a new one on me. Is there another name for it? Pictures anyone?

It has to do with the feet at the bottom of the overly large "P" in the example below:

Offline Claudia Killebrew

  • Forever in our hearts!
  • Regular member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2076
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New York Times article on cast iron cookware
« Reply #5 on: June 29, 2016, 01:53:11 PM »
Thank you. Didn't know it had that name.

Offline Jim Glatthaar

  • WAGS member
  • Regular member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2013
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • WAGS: Heartbeat of Cast Iron Cookware Collecting
Re: New York Times article on cast iron cookware
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2016, 11:13:29 PM »
I agree, great article.  It reminds me why I got into this in the first place.  I wanted a cast iron skillet to cook with.  After researching, the consensus was that the older skillets were better made and better to cook with.  Since I can never buy one of anything I bought #8 & #10 Wagner stylized logos to cook with.  Now, over 150 cast iron pieces later ... :o

Offline C. Perry Rapier

  • Regular member
  • *
  • Posts: 26152
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: New York Times article on cast iron cookware
« Reply #7 on: June 29, 2016, 11:19:27 PM »
This is a wonderful article. In the article they talk about four generations that have come from Corbin, Ky. That is where I am from, originally. Thanks for posting this Mark. And Jim, I know exactly what you are talking about. I remember one day a long time ago I laid out my cast iron pieces and I had thirty two pieces plus three or four more that I was using at the time. And I thought WOW I never realized I had so many pieces.  ;D

Offline Jim Glatthaar

  • WAGS member
  • Regular member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2013
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • WAGS: Heartbeat of Cast Iron Cookware Collecting
Re: New York Times article on cast iron cookware
« Reply #8 on: June 30, 2016, 12:03:15 AM »
Boy is that funny, Perry.  To think you only had 35 or 36 pieces, that is  ;D ;D ;D